SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
The Big Bad Mookie Betts Thread
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 23, 2014 7:52:52 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Apr 23, 2014 8:09:59 GMT -5
BA's Ben Badler tweet
Mookie Betts tonight: Two singles, two walks, two stolen bases. OBP now over .500. He's going to be a star. 9:42pm - 22 Apr 14
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 23, 2014 8:21:33 GMT -5
Can't wait for midseason lists. Does Mookie break the top 10? Top 20? Is he the Sox #1?
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Apr 23, 2014 10:52:16 GMT -5
I’d like to see Mookie become a Chone Figgins type of player for the Sox, and other than Figgins being a switch hitter I think he is probably a great comp for Mookie with regards to both physical stature and skill set. In his years with the Angels, Figgins was one of the most dynamic and versatile players in baseball, and I think Betts compares favorably to Figgins in a lot of ways. Just from memory, Figgins was an above average 2B, an average to slightly above average 3B, and an athletic outfielder who played most of his OF games CF. I’d love to see Mookie learn to play a good OF, and develop into a similar type player to Figgins for the Sox.
Offensively, Figgins and Betts profiles are similar, fast twitch athletes, advanced approach high OBP hitters, dangerous on the bases, and surprising power for their size (Figgins 5’8” / Betts 5’9”).
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Apr 23, 2014 15:08:54 GMT -5
Comment..
Over the off season Sox brass twice said in podcasts that if they were going to try Mookie at other positions, it would be after he was comfortable at the plate. I'm guessing they think Mookie is comfortable at the plate yet, when Marrero was unavailable for two games with a toe injury, Mookie played 2nd base, Gibson played short. With Petey, if they leave Mooke at 2nd base, Mookie trade chip becomes more likely.
To me, Mookie, Xander, Swihart and Owens would be untouchable. I wouldn't want to include any of them in a trade which involved trading for a current player that was going to cost the team significant dollars. However, I would trade an untouchable prospect for another untouchable prospect if the trade made sense position wise for the Sox. The trade would also, of course, need to make sense for the other team.
I submit for your approval (because of the non human element), our favorite trading partner and Gregory Polanco. 4 of the The Pirates top 10 prospects are outfielders (Polonco, Meadows, Bell, Ramirez), they have two outfielders that aren't going anywhere (Marte & Mr. Dreadlocks) and they have a decent veteran RF in Snyder as well as a decent 4th outfielder in Tabata. At second they have Neil Walker on a one year contract and absolutely nobody in the pipeline.
Gregory Polanco (MLB's #13 prospect) would be perfect for The Sox future in RF, a less premium position than 2B but, we already have one of those. I would love to keep Mookie but if he is traded, hopefully his star will keep rising to the point that if he was traded, he'd return us a significant piece.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Apr 23, 2014 16:32:08 GMT -5
Comment.. Over the off season Sox brass twice said in podcasts that if they were going to try Mookie at other positions, it would be after he was comfortable at the plate. I'm guessing they think Mookie is comfortable at the plate yet, when Marrero was unavailable for two games with a toe injury, Mookie played 2nd base, Gibson played short. With Petey, if they leave Mooke at 2nd base, Mookie trade chip becomes more likely. To me, Mookie, Xander, Swihart and Owens would be untouchable. I wouldn't want to include any of them in a trade which involved trading for a current player that was going to cost the team significant dollars. However, I would trade an untouchable prospect for another untouchable prospect if the trade made sense position wise for the Sox. The trade would also, of course, need to make sense for the other team. I submit for your approval (because of the non human element), our favorite trading partner and Gregory Polanco. 4 of the The Pirates top 10 prospects are outfielders (Polonco, Meadows, Bell, Ramirez), they have two outfielders that aren't going anywhere (Marte & Mr. Dreadlocks) and they have a decent veteran RF in Snyder as well as a decent 4th outfielder in Tabata. At second they have Neil Walker on a one year contract and absolutely nobody in the pipeline. Gregory Polanco (MLB's #13 prospect) would be perfect for The Sox future in RF, a less premium position than 2B but, we already have one of those. I would love to keep Mookie but if he is traded, hopefully his star will keep rising to the point that if he was traded, he'd return us a significant piece. Mike Trout + "significant dollars" > Blake Swihart
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 23, 2014 16:33:50 GMT -5
Lets move all trade discussion to the Trade Proposal Subforum, please.
|
|
|
Post by wskeleton76 on Apr 23, 2014 16:35:02 GMT -5
I’d like to see Mookie become a Chone Figgins type of player for the Sox, and other than Figgins being a switch hitter I think he is probably a great comp for Mookie with regards to both physical stature and skill set. In his years with the Angels, Figgins was one of the most dynamic and versatile players in baseball, and I think Betts compares favorably to Figgins in a lot of ways. Just from memory, Figgins was an above average 2B, an average to slightly above average 3B, and an athletic outfielder who played most of his OF games CF. I’d love to see Mookie learn to play a good OF, and develop into a similar type player to Figgins for the Sox. Offensively, Figgins and Betts profiles are similar, fast twitch athletes, advanced approach high OBP hitters, dangerous on the bases, and surprising power for their size (Figgins 5’8” / Betts 5’9”). While Chone Figgins is a typical slap hitter with little power Mookie drives the ball with authority really well. Also he has sneaky power due to his quick hands.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,729
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Apr 23, 2014 16:39:10 GMT -5
Mookie hypothetically could be somewhere between Figgins and Zobrist. Obviously that's what you'd be hoping for.
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Apr 23, 2014 18:38:09 GMT -5
Figgins had no power whatsoever. Mookie might be a total bust for all we know, but if we're gonna dream I think we can dream a bit bigger than that.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Apr 23, 2014 22:39:03 GMT -5
I'm showing my age a little bit here but other than Zobrist a good comp would be Tony Phillips, formerly with the A's and Tigers during the 1980s and 1990s who had more speed than Zobrist and had some sneaky surprise power the way that Betts does. He also had a great eye at the plate and was an excellent leadoff hitter in his prime. He also played all over the diamond. He started off as a 2b, could play SS in a pinch but was more suited for 3b and had plenty of experience in LF. Mookie Betts has a shot at being Tony Phillips with a bit less power, more speed, and with a higher BA.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Apr 24, 2014 0:15:09 GMT -5
Comment.. Over the off season Sox brass twice said in podcasts that if they were going to try Mookie at other positions, it would be after he was comfortable at the plate. I'm guessing they think Mookie is comfortable at the plate yet, when Marrero was unavailable for two games with a toe injury, Mookie played 2nd base, Gibson played short. With Petey, if they leave Mooke at 2nd base, Mookie trade chip becomes more likely. To me, Mookie, Xander, Swihart and Owens would be untouchable. I wouldn't want to include any of them in a trade which involved trading for a current player that was going to cost the team significant dollars. However, I would trade an untouchable prospect for another untouchable prospect if the trade made sense position wise for the Sox. The trade would also, of course, need to make sense for the other team. I submit for your approval (because of the non human element), our favorite trading partner and Gregory Polanco. 4 of the The Pirates top 10 prospects are outfielders (Polonco, Meadows, Bell, Ramirez), they have two outfielders that aren't going anywhere (Marte & Mr. Dreadlocks) and they have a decent veteran RF in Snyder as well as a decent 4th outfielder in Tabata. At second they have Neil Walker on a one year contract and absolutely nobody in the pipeline. Gregory Polanco (MLB's #13 prospect) would be perfect for The Sox future in RF, a less premium position than 2B but, we already have one of those. I would love to keep Mookie but if he is traded, hopefully his star will keep rising to the point that if he was traded, he'd return us a significant piece. Mike Trout + "significant dollars" > Blake Swihart Then we should do that. I'm pretty sure the Angels would jump all over a Swihart for Trout swap. Also, I'm not so sure yet that Mookie has the arm strength to be a Zobrist/Phillips. Maybe a hydraulics upgrade is in order.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 24, 2014 7:32:11 GMT -5
There's a lot of projection to even mention that he might be able to play multiple positions (with elite to borderline elite defense) when he has only played one. It takes a whole lot of work to become a good defensive player at one position, let alone multiple. That's why guys like Zobrist come along once every 50 years or so.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Apr 24, 2014 7:55:01 GMT -5
There's a lot of projection to even mention that he might be able to play multiple positions (with elite to borderline elite defense) when he has only played one. It takes a whole lot of work to become a good defensive player at one position, let alone multiple. That's why guys like Zobrist come along once every 50 years or so. I find the whole super-utility dreaming a little silly. It's not like anyone would look at Mookie and say "oh, well clearly he needs to be the next Ben Zobrist with this skill set", EXCEPT that people don't want to trade him and they can't move Pedroia off second base. Realistically, if he can't play shortstop he then he can't get enough PAs as a utility guy when the Red Sox have a 2B who never misses a game. And if he can play shortstop... well then just make him a shortstop.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 24, 2014 8:05:50 GMT -5
These things will work themselves out, but I think the least likeliest option is that he becomes a Zobrist-type.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Apr 24, 2014 9:04:40 GMT -5
Part of Mookies's overall talent appears to be his ability to adapt to multiple sports. Call it athleticism, or aptitude, or whatever but doesn't it appear by now that this guy is coachable as hell and a quick learner? Look at his trend line and how he did it. Not that much baseball experience at first but he seemed to work on his approach right off the bat. The first thing we noticed was his ability to draw walks. This indicated that he was trying to adapt the Redsox overall program with some early success. And over a year's time he becomes the Mookie Monster. His trend line is probably to a degree statistical noise but we have to recognize that his trend line is almost off the charts good. He keeps getting better at an incredible rate.
And that is probably the best aspect of the Mookie phenomena. I think the guy has a tremendous profile to become a multiple position player, a Zobrist type. If he doesn't who does? This has been my approach with him for at least 6 months now. He's blocked by Pedroia but looks like a guy who could really make in in mlb. Other teams are probably not going to value him like we do. We can always use good young players who are controllable and cheap. We should almost always keep the guys we think will really make it. Why not phase Mookie in, even if is mainly as a 2 position athlete, for example CF and 2nd. Or RF, and 2nd. In that way he can get a lot of AB as he adapts to mlb and contribute to the team also as a late inning base runner etc...as he refines his game.
I want Mookie with the big club sooner, rather than later. The guys bat looks like it might even be ready by year end.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 24, 2014 9:09:05 GMT -5
I think the guy has a tremendous profile to become a multiple position player, a Zobrist type. If he doesn't who does? Nobody. Name one other Zobrist type.
|
|
|
Post by terriblehondo on Apr 24, 2014 9:52:13 GMT -5
I think the guy has a tremendous profile to become a multiple position player, a Zobrist type. If he doesn't who does? Nobody. Name one other Zobrist type. Right now nobody is like Zobrist. But when you watch Tampa and see the advantage of having someone like Zobrist. If you have a guy with the tools to do it you should at least give it a shot to see if he can. If he cannot what have you lost? I think you could put him in left field in Fenway tonight and he would be better than Carp or Gomes. Then again I have seen 12 year olds that would be better also.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Apr 24, 2014 10:00:21 GMT -5
Mike Trout + "significant dollars" > Blake Swihart Then we should do that. I'm pretty sure the Angels would jump all over a Swihart for Trout swap. Also, I'm not so sure yet that Mookie has the arm strength to be a Zobrist/Phillips. Maybe a hydraulics upgrade is in order. Point being you can't use words like "untouchable" or speak in absolute terms when there are many exceptions (Trout being just the biggest one). I love Swihart too but he's far from untouchable. If anything this Red Sox team is in perfect position to take on "significant dollars" for the right elite talent if the opportunity comes up. I'd love to trade for another elite prospect like Polanco, but how often does an elite prospect for prospect swap happen? Once every five years maybe? The endowment effect is very real with prospects.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Apr 24, 2014 10:17:35 GMT -5
Call it athleticism, or aptitude, or whatever but doesn't it appear by now that this guy is coachable as hell and a quick learner? Wouldn't you say the same thing about Xander? Did that help Xander become an excellent defender at shortstop?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 24, 2014 10:37:41 GMT -5
For me, Swihart and Betts are untouchable in any trade that might ever happen in reality.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Apr 24, 2014 11:34:03 GMT -5
I think there are probably diminishing returns in having a guy play all over the field. Ergo, why not focus Betts on 2-3 positions max. We don't probably need a guy who can play every position on the field. The goal is adding positional flexibility, to cover better for injuries, periodic days off..etc. Teams like Tampa don't have the cash to invest in a lot of depth, ergo the added value of Zobrist to their roster. With us, with a dedicated DH, we have less inherent positional flexibility as a result, and could benefit from a multipositional player option or 2, but it doesn't need to be a Zobrist level player in terms of flexibility. We can afford more depth.
For example Youk was extremely handy to have around. And look at the benefit Cincinnati had from Billy Hamilton on the bench just as a late inning base stealer. If our super sub can also steal bases that is an added benefit. In many, many ways Betts would be a huge benefit to this team if he is phased in as a multipositional super sub player. A late inning pinch runner. A guy who can pinch hit to get on base. A defensive replacement. An injury sub long term somewhere ( Pedroia, Victorino...etc ). And he would be cheap and it would be an excellent way to break him into mlb sooner, rather than later.
And as far as I'm concerned, we are still in win now mode. We need him sooner, rather than later.
In terms of trade options, I doubt anyone is going to value Betts like we do. No one is going to believe he's for real, to the level we do (If the FO really believes... how would I know? ). He sure looks for real to me but if you have a guy you really believe in don't trade him. Trade the guys you don't believe in or the ones you have some doubts about. If we don't have a slot for Betts, and we are sure we can't get even better value ( Byron Buxton ), then find a role for him in your mlb lineup. And we aren't going to bench Pedroia or Bogaerts for that matter either. So why not phase him in as a super sub? It would be a waste to just make him an OF, or something like that.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Apr 24, 2014 11:40:11 GMT -5
Call it athleticism, or aptitude, or whatever but doesn't it appear by now that this guy is coachable as hell and a quick learner? Wouldn't you say the same thing about Xander? Did that help Xander become an excellent defender at shortstop? Xander is obviously a quick learner and an excellent athlete, but he doesn't appear to me to have as much defensive aptitude as Betts, or necessarily as much defensive potential in general. Both appear to have plus intangibles but if I had to give an edge in terms of situational awareness, and thoughtful self examination, I'd give it to Betts. From what little I have seen in terms of their interviews and such. And Xander's bat is so good, you obviously want him playing every day. Betts might be similar in that regard but I doubt his OPS ever approaches Xanders. Another guy who I think has even more Zobrist potential is Swihart. That kid is an extremely good overall athlete. He looks like he could play almost anywhere on the field.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 24, 2014 11:56:00 GMT -5
Ah yes, Betts' great "situational awareness" and "thoughtful self examination," as ascertained solely through a handful of media interviews, these are the two traits that will make him an excellent defensive player at multiple positions.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 24, 2014 12:26:36 GMT -5
To be less snarky for a second, there are real reasons to be optimistic about Betts. For one thing, he's a far better athlete than Xander ever was, and he has the sort of frame that projects to remain athletic as he gets older. Moreover, he appears to have rare hand-eye coordination as well as excellent vision, two critically important hitting traits that also help a player on the defensive side. Here's minor league hitting coordinator Tim Hyers: We know that the Red Sox are one of the teams that use neurological tests to evaluate players, something that first began during the Epstein era. Here's John Farrell elaborating on what this entails and specifically mentioning Betts as one player who tests out well: If Betts is one of those guys with elite hand-eye coordination, that bodes well for his defensive future. It would suggest that he might be one of those rare athletes with preternatural ability to read the ball off the bat correctly and make the right split-second first step. He might be able to track batted balls off the bat as well as he tracks them out of a pitcher's hand. Pedroia is the obvious comp here-- a guy whose hand-eye coordination was good enough to max out his limited natural tools. Now, imagine we're talking about a guy in Betts who is a much better raw athlete but has the same otherworldly hand-eye coordination. That's pretty exciting. Unfortunately, similar to Pedroia, Betts' middling arm may ultimately hold him back. Arm strength is just one of those things that is difficult to improve much, and that's pretty much the only reason why Pedroia ended up at 2B as opposed to SS. Maybe you live with a fringy arm at SS to get Betts on the field, but that's the main reason I think moving him there is not quite a slam dunk. (It should be noted that infield coordinator Andy Fox said Betts had the arm strength for SS, but that's what you'd expect him to say in that situation and I'm not sure it tells us anything useful.) Similarly, while CF (and LF) are definitely an option, RF might be out of the cards.
|
|
|